Rachel’s Words

Rachel’s Words
Originally uploaded by marcynewman.

Packed into a tiny corner of Books@Cafe in Amman, around fifty people gathered to read and listen to Rachel Corrie’s words on Friday night. The event brought Americans and Jordanians to an event because people seemed to be craving some sort of political activity–especially Jordanians. Although this wasn’t a demonstration in the streets or anything like that, I think–I hope–that it energized people to do more. Coming on the heels of the Jericho invasion it was moving to be reminded of Corrie’s writings on the numerous invasions she encountered in Rafah, Ghaza.

One Jordanian friend asked me what I thought about the fact that this white, blonde, non-threatening, American woman gets so much attention when so many Palestinians die in silence as far as people on the other side of the Atlantic are concerned. I do think that racism undergirds this issue and is why she is a voice that Americans, for instance, are willing to listen to when they can’t hear the words of Palestinians themselves. But I don’t think it can be reduced merely to an issue of race or nationality. Bearing witness is crucial in any conflict–both bearing one’s own and also those of people whose voices can’t be heard by a wide enough public. I believe that bearing witness to another person’s pain or suffering is one of the most important things a human being can do. And because it is so difficult for people to listen to what Rachel had to say–even three years after her death–I think this is a clear indication why her writings must be widely read and studied.

The Nation has two really interesting articles this week about this issue. One “An American Inquisition?” highlights precisely how Zionist intimidation functions in the U.S. The other “Too Hot for New York” is a really thorough piece on the play and its censorship.

On another note, President Jimmy Carter published an interesting article in Ha’aretz this weekend.



3 thoughts on “Rachel’s Words

  1. I agree with you that the American public, on the other side of the globe, perhaps could relate better to a voice of their own recounting the miseries it had witnessed.

  2. To be fair, the people who put on the play have been very concious of priveledging Rachel’s death over millions of suffering Palestinians. I think that makes the play’s message even more powerful.

  3. Sorry to differ. But people just wanted there to be discussions after the Rachael Corrie play, and for the theater to consider putting on a play about the Middle East that was more nuanced than the Palestinians as helpless victims of Israeli violence, defended by lovely blonde American girl. Instead of saying, “no,” or “Why not–we’ll think about it,” the theater chose to postpone (really cancel) the play. It was the theater’s cowardice, not the pro-Israel groups’ advocacy, that deserves your criticism.
    If people are afraid of controversy, they should not be in the theater business.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s